Trial reportBMC veterinary research2016
Bioequivalence study between two formulations of ciclosporin A (Cyclavance® oral solution and Atopica® soft capsules) following a single oral administration to dogs.
Trial report in BMC veterinary research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preparation of altrenogest soft capsules and their bioequivalence in gilts.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Clinical Guidelines for the Use of Antipruritic Drugs in the Control of the Most Frequent Pruritic Skin Diseases in Dogs.Veterinary sciences · 2022Review
- Pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence of two cyclosporine oral solution formulations in cats.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Comparative study to evaluate the voluntary acceptance of two liquid oral formulations of ciclosporin in dogs.Irish veterinary journal · 2018Article
- The Diabetic Dog as a Translational Model for Human Islet Transplantation.The Yale journal of biology and medicine · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCiclosporin is a selective immunomodulator used for the treatment of atopic dermatitis in dogs. A new 100 mg/ml oral solution formulation (Cyclavance®, Virbac) was developed as a pharmaceutical equivalent to the marketed capsule formulations (Atopica®, Novartis Animal Health) containing 25, 50 mg, or 100 mg of ciclosporin A. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the pharmacokinetic profiles and bioequivalence of the two formulations following a single oral administration to dogs. This randomised, two-period, two-sequence, crossover bioequivalence study was conducted in 40 healthy dogs under fasting conditions. Each dog received either one 50 mg capsule of Atopica® or 0.5 ml of Cyclavance®. After dosing, blood samples were collected during a 48-h time period at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 h. Blood ciclosporin A concentrations were measured by using an HPLC-MS/MS method. Cmax, Tmax, t1/2, AUC0-t, AUC0-∞ and Kel were determined for the two ciclosporin formulations. Bioequivalence was to be concluded if the 90% confidence intervals were within the range of 80% to 125% for Cmax and AUC0-t. Dogs were monitored once daily throughout the study period for adverse effects.
resultsThe 90% confidence intervals for Cyclavance®/Atopica® mean ratios of the log-transformed pharmacokinetic variables Cmax and AUC0-t were within the conventional bioequivalence range of 80% to 125% (Point estimate: 101.2% and 101.4% respectively). Except for salivation reported after administration of both products, or vomiting and diarrhoea reported after Atopica® administration, both formulations were well tolerated in the 40 healthy dogs over the 48-h study period.
conclusionsThe two ciclosporin oral formulations demonstrated similar pharmacokinetic profiles and were found to be bioequivalent, and therefore, interchangeable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.